HDFS 0.20 does not have a reliable append.
Also it is (was last time I looked) incompatible with the 0.21 append HDFS-256.
That wouldn't be a problem if that was the only incompatibility. But it's not.
If 1.0 is re-labeled or re-branched from 0.20 we will have to many
incompatibilities
going into further releases so that we will have to call all of them major ones
for the foreseeable future.
I don't understand what is wrong with 0.21 released from 0.21?
- Making a new release from trunk will take long time to stabilize.
- Branching out 0.20.x as 1.0 introduces too many incompatibilities.
I would like to propose a straightforward release of 0.21 from current 0.21
branch.
--Konstantin
On 3/31/2010 9:04 AM, Doug Cutting wrote:
Owen O'Malley wrote:
It is tempting and I think that 0.20 is *really* our 1.0, but I think
re-labeling a release a year after it came out would be confusing.
I wasn't proposing just a re-labeling. I was proposing a new release,
branched from 0.20 rather than trunk. We'd introduce some changes, after
voting on each of course. Candidates are MAPREDUCE-1623 and
MAPREDUCE-1650, to better clarify what's intended to be supported in
1.0, and HDFS-200, to make append reliable.
Since we have not yet made a 0.21 release, this numbering would be
consistent. It also naturally permits further 1.x releases that add
features, like security.
Doug
